Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • A while back I speculated on the various proposals for a "CPAN Replacement" I saw and mentioned that it appeared to me that there was a lack of planning.

    Mark asked me to not comment on CPAN6 until after the release at YAPC::EU and gave me an early copy of the paper, and I've happily done so.

    But reading through the final version of the paper, some concerns remain.

    Without wanting to get too much into specifics, I was wondering how you plan to deal with this type of thing. I see a lot of detail on what your so
    • The CPAN is very large and very complex, and replacing it isn't going to be as simple as we might think.

      Not true. The CPAN is rather small by today's standards and very simple. Clearly, you've not read the Zen paper describing the mechanics of it in very simple, straighforward terms. You are correct in supposing that it will not be simple to replace, but likely not for the right reasons. Anyone can build an ftp archive, put it on the net and open it for business. What makes CPAN work is not to be foun

      • My concern for this project is that clearly little research was done into what has been done in the past (e.g. that we had already agreed to Audrey's request to make a 6pan repos on the existing CPAN)

        While this was news to us, and our research did not uncover this - nor did any of the people at YAPC::Europe mention this to us - the efforts need not conflict; I hope they can re-inforce one another.

        CPAN is about the only thing keeping a lot of users of perl around and introducing a P6-like CPAN archive

        • This is a confusing assertion. Why would users care if another system is being built to replace it, especially if we are extremely careful not to switch the old one off for several years? It will be giving them only more options.

          Because if the same sort of design and implementation limbo that now exists with P6 with P5 more or less moribund, is introduced to CPAN, it has the potential to finally push away those who are already on the fence. One being dead and one not being implemented with far too many